Justin’s sort of Me Too moment

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Lastpointe

Lastpointe

Well-Known Member
we haven’t discussed the controversy around the PM lately.

Background is that an old editorial surfaced where the writer accused him of inappropriate touching at a music festival. His apology, which is part of the editorial, states I wouldn’t have been so forward if I knew you were working for an National Paper. The small town paper was at the time, as many are, owned by the Post

An odd apology

So now it has come back to bite him.

He has stated many times that women are to be believed. Which if course is contrary to our judicial system where one is innocent until proven guilty. But that has been his position

He has removed men from his cabinet, from his caucus.
He has outed men for bad behaviour before investigations. Some sexual, some affairs, some seeming to be just inability to understand social mores

Now what does he do?


The twist is that the reporter , while standing by her story and stating the event occurred as reported , is not going public

So far he has made many conflicting statements that are very weaselly.

Patrick Brown was taken down by what appears to be clumsy dating.
Justin Trudeau appears to be skating on an old charge of sexual assault. Man handling someone sexually is sexual assault

Thoughts?
 
Free willies rules ... they can go anywhere without bounds ... should they be ethically limited or just through moral conditions that appear to be shaky given what goes on in oligarchies ... poor role modelling? It must go deeper ...

Like a stable post has a deeper side ... however the superficial can't see it ...

There sticks in the dirt agitate those buried there ... like a river of sticks ... mental anomalies ... metaphors and metaphysics?
 
Justin is the beneficiary of a number of factors. Time (it happened in 2000, before he was even in politics), the fact that the woman isn't speaking out beyond confirming the event, the fact that he apologized at the time (which she confirmed), the fact that his administration is generally seen as a positive one for women, maybe others. His approval rating has been slipping for other reasons, though, so it may be hard to tell how much this is actually hurting him unless someone specifically polls on this question.
 
As for how it affects my personal opinion of Trudeau, I wasn't a fan to start with. I didn't vote Liberal and I was a bit cynical/skeptical about the kid from the get-go and remain so. So the effect on me is probably minimal in political terms. The effect on those who did vote for him, especially women, could be significant, though. And it's only one year until the next election. The flipside is that a woman who leaves the Libs over this isn't likely to go Conservative so the NDP could be the main beneficiary if it does start to hurt Trudeau.
 
I agree that he wasn’t in politics and so perhaps that is a mitigating circumstance. But old accusations have surfaced about a lot of people and they stick

Perhaps this will do some damage. It certainly shows hypocrasy. He boots people from caucus but sort of can’t really remember his own issue. Or now he can remember but doesn’t think it was a problem. Or now sort of remembers but thinks he apologized even though he didn’t think he did anything wrong....,, in all honesty following the story is confusing as to what the current story is

But as a 28 year old, who grew up in the spot light. Who was raising money with his famous name for his famous dead brothers legacy he should have known better

It was never ok to grab someone’s ass. Or kiss them or whatever. Even then it was not ok
 
unlike Weinstein, he straightened up and even went beyond, to encouraging equality and standing against sexual harassment, and doing something about it now. What he did in the past was wrong...but maybe the woman who is silent is silent because she appreciates the change and effort and it doesn't seem worth it to punish him now? The overall benefit to having a PM who cares now, may be better than punishing him for his past? His job, in that regard, is a net positive for women. My opinion would be different if he was acting that way today.

I have been treated badly by men when they were younger. i've been groped. i'm not traumatized by some idiot individuals who grabbed my butt on occasions long ago when they were being idiots. I just wish men would stop behaving that way. I think most of them are likely more grown up now.
 
Last edited:
I'm not interested in going on a revenge mission. it would occupy my entire life, there's been so many times. For those who are going after Weinstein...is he the only instance? Really? because i can't even count them all. the thing with him is how much of a pathological problem he had...how many women he continued to prey on. I'd rather see change than revenge and ruining lives over isolated, long ago, screw ups.
 
Last edited:
I had a female "best friend" who pushed me down and kicked me once when she was drunk. And she dragged me into situations with the kind of men who abuse...because she was abused. I get it but it is still painful to look back on. I'm more traumatized over the fact that it took me 20 or so more years to figure out that she wasn't a very good friend, and I miss what wasn't really there...I never had a best friend...that is more upsetting to my psyche than the idiot strangers in bars who touched my butt. Even then, I wish her healing. I wouldn't go back and try to punish her. I know how much she has also suffered abuse.
 
Do we judge a person guilty for doing pretty much the norm for the time; today's standardds to yesterday's crime?
Things that were acceptable twenty years ago, are not acceptable now. As far as we know just what happened during the groping is unknown.
Was it an unwanted kiss? A hand on the knee that gradually slides upward until it is pushed back?
When I was young it was taken for granted that boys would be testing the limits and girls were expected to set those limits. Just saying 'no' was part of the game. Sometimes people misread the signals or the rules were a bit different with different groups.

So a young man is at a social gathering. He sees an attractive woman. They get chatting. He turns on the charm and she appears to be enjoying talking with him. He puts on some moves; she backs away but continues talking. She isn't here to party; she's looking for a story for the society column in the newspaper. Hee treats it as a joke and steps up his moves. She is offended; he is not treating her as the professional she tries to present herself as being. She sees somebody across the room that she just has to speak to, and walks away. He shrugs it off. Everybody strikes out once in awhile, but it was fun while it lasted. The next day he thinks about it and realizes that she avoided him the rest of the evening and seemed really angry. He phones and apoligizes. Mean while she mentions it to a a friend at the newspaper who writes an editorial. Nothing more is said or done; the incident is forgotten. Until 20 years later someone digs up that column.

No, I don't know just what happened, perhaps I'm making light of it, perhaps it was more serious. But if that is all people can come up with in his past, then I don't think we need worry.

ps - I didn't vote for him, but I sure like some of the things he's said and done. Seelerman likes him (as much as he likes anybody in politics.)
 
Mendalla said:
This was eighteen years. Standards haven't changed that much since 2000.
Click to expand...
No. Not that much, but some. I never thought of getting my butt touched in a bar, or a guy getting a little too forward in thinking I was more interested than I was, and making a move involving touching a leg or arm, as “assault”. I used to think of assault as involving physical pain...whether simply assault, or with a sexual element to it. Being pinned down and hit, with force, or being pinned down and touched with force...for example. Had the former happen...it’s worse than a butt touch. Somebody touches your butt but you have the freedom to walk away...tell them off and walk away. It doesn’t make it good behaviour...and it is changing. But we women were supposed to be good sports about “boys being boys”, even in 2000. A guy grabbed my butt in a bar in 2008. If I even knew how to find him, i wouldn’t bother. Even if he is some politician now. The bouncers would’ve kicked him out, but the cops had bigger things to deal with. What was more bothersome was that my ex was raging mad when I told him...when it didn’t happen to him...and didn’t respect that I wasn’t as upset as he was...because it’s happened so many times over the years I could let it go. That doesn’t mean it’s okay. But I chose to deal with it by not letting it get the better of me...and that was my choice.

I’m guessing she doesn’t want to go after him, but others who hate him and are filled with rage, want her to.
 
I don’t know what is right. But I see him trying to more or less by pass this when he has been harsh on others

20 years ago it wasn’t ok to grab someone’s butt. And he was a famous person. Let’s not forget that a son of a forme prime minister should know better

I doubt it will cause him much trouble except that he is pretty mushy about his comments and that isn’t good. It is hypocrasy

But it hasn’t been a good year for old Justin. Lots of unfulfilled promises. Lots of non transparent issues. This is just another one
 
It was never okay - definitely disrespectful - but we maybe just used to put up with it and saved the ire for more violent abuse. Maybe, today, women have just reached the boiling point and we’ve said “enough!” to all of it, all at once... but there are degrees of abuse, IMO, and degrees callousness and disregard, and violence, and it sounds like Justin’s infraction was fairly minor. The reporter already shamed him, publicly, in the paper, back then. She wasn’t shy to. She didn’t keep it secret out of humiliation. She could’ve followed up then if she was really intent on punishing him. She apparently wasn’t. We don’t know exactly what he even did. He probably did whatever it was, but maybe he’s changed. Grown up, married, settled down, and learned to respect women better - even to recognize it on a policy level.

If he was hanging out with guys from Whistler in those days, if that was near the time he worked in a bar, I wouldn’t be surprised anyway. Not saying it’s right, or ever was right... just sayin’ it wasn’t uncommon. The “anytime is party time, dudes” guys I remember in the late 90s early 2000s weren’t too respectful of women...or much of anything. But they grow up. And, benefit of the doubt, maybe he grew up.
 
Last edited:
Mendalla said:
This was eighteen years. Standards haven't changed that much since 2000.
Click to expand...

Standards are like up righteous ... status quo that cannot alter ... thus the slow learning curve of those addicted to free emotions ... intellect is extremely subtle ... profound outliers ..
 
Not in the slightest because You Know Who is trying to totally delegitimization it, though, right? Then the right wing news, like Quillette, runs with it, to help him try to do that.


He’s a real piece of work, this guy.
 
Is groping required when in the dark?

The mother mystique ... it may be a ghost like or nebulous image ...
 
I do agree with Kimmio on this one - I think much learning & maturation has occured for Trudeau over the past 18 years. I did hear him speak about the incident in an interview & I found his response to be respectful. I certainly have been in a position where my actions or words were interpreted differently than intended - so I don't feel in a position to judge on the scant information provided regarding the allegation of sexual assault - which is a broad category.

As a bit of an aside - I do find it interesting that many people (media, people on-line, etc.) refer to Prime Minister Trudeau as "Justin" - as Trump does. Seems disrespectful to me. I can't really think of any other national /world leaders who are generally referred to by first name.
 
The ones who refer to him as "Justin" are the polite ones. Those who want to ridicule his manhood or toughness go with "Justine." Those who want to ridicule his intelligence go with "Trudope." I do remember that George Bush once referred to Stephen Harper as "Steve" during a press conference at the White House - and a mini-furor erupted in Canada over the lack of respect shown.

The allegations against Trudeau are more a problem of optics than anything else. He has drawn a pretty firm line in the sand in some ways. Some have compared this to the two Liberal MPs he booted out of caucus because of an allegation of improper behaviour by two anonymous female NDP MPs who had no desire apparently to pursue the issue (which begs the question of why they bothered raising it with Trudeau if they didn't want him to do anything, but that's another debate.) There are some similarities. What I find most bothersome, though, is the linkage of this with the #MeToo movement. #MeToo is a way of giving women who had been victimized a chance to speak out. This isn't a #MeToo moment - if only because the woman in question doesn't want to speak out, instead saying that as far as she's concerned the incident (whatever it is that actually happened) is in the past and she doesn't care to pursue it. Instead, people are using the #MeToo hashtag for political reasons - ie, to embarrass Trudeau and score political points rather than to make a statement about sexual assault.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top